TO A. G. SHLYAPNIKOV

Written:Written after June 4, 1916Published:First published in 1929 in the journalProletarskaya RevolutsiaNo. 7.

      Sent from Zurich to Christiania.

      Printed from the original.Source:Lenin
	  Collected Works,

      Progress Publishers,1971,

      Moscow,Volume 36,

      pages401-402.Translated:Andrew RothsteinTranscription\Markup:R. CymbalaPublic Domain:Lenin Internet Archive.You may freely copy, distribute,
	display and perform this work, as well as make derivative and
	commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet
	Archive” as your source.•README

DearAlexander,

Iwrote to you briefly yesterday. Today I want to have a
further talk.

Iam revolted by the “conditions” laid down by the
Japanese. That two editors should have the right to decide on
inserting an article written for discussion purposes by a
contributor! Not even three, but only two: in other words,
the publishers “depend” on no one but
themselves.[1]

Themeaning of this clause is clear: they want to hide
behind Radek andinflameour differences with him and
with the
P.S.D.[2]This is not discussion, but the height of
intrigue, the utmost cravenness. It’s just as it was in Paris in
1911, when we were “dragged” into a discussion with
Rappoport, or Lyova, or Viktoryonok, or Bogdanov! I have
written to, you that the PolishGazeta Robotnicza(February
1916) is attacking us just like those Parisians did then.

Inno circumstances will I join an editorial board which is
intriguing in this way, under the guise of discussion. If you,
Japanese, want to help to disorganise our Party, do it onyour ownresponsibility. Your purse is full. Go ahead and
publish the “discussion” by Radek orGazeta Robotnicza:
then theRussianworkers will see at once that you are
intriguers, and will kick you out. But you want toplaythis
mean trickunder coverof a “collective board”. Sorry, but I
won’t accept this and will expose you. That is my reply
to the Japanese on this question.

Thesame goes for “equal rights” (the elimination of the
seventh member, or voting on
him).[3]This is a
continuation of the old “game”. What has Party membership got
to do with it? The point is that we are to give “equal rights”to people who have shown themselves in thenegative! Why
should we? Equal rights = the right to spoil the work! In
the name of what? For what purpose? To make dissensionpermanent?

No.If they want to make anewexperiment, we shall take
anewjournal, or more preciselymiscellany,
andtry(the
old confidence has been undermined) to issue one with an
editorial board of seven. We shall make theexperiment:
this is the maximum concession which I can conscientiously
allow. If the experiment fails, the intriguers and the
capitalists lose nothing, because the “purse” can always be
withdrawn. And we shall then issue our own miscellany. One
that is simple, clear and without intrigue.

Iwish you all the best, and ask you to be patient.

Yours,Lenin

[1]Areference to the draft agreement on the further publication ofKommunist, drawn up by G. Pyatakov and Yevgenia Bosch, and
transmitted by A. Shlyapnikov to Lenin. In the text of the draft
Lenin struck out the following points:

“Thefounders of the publishing house and its responsible
representatives are Comrades P. and N. Kievsky”;

“Theconsent of at least two editors is required for the insertion
of articles by contributors in theKommunist’sDiscussion
Section....”;

“Thesixth person is to be co-opted to the publishing house
on the recommendation of Comrades Lenin and Zinoviev.
Comrades Lenin and Zinoviev have the right to recommend a seventh
person to the publishing house from among Party writers but his
admission is to be subject to a vote and is to be decided by a
simple majority of the editors....”

ThePoint 6 mentioned by Lenin is given in the draft agreement
as follows:

“6.TheRight of the C.C.

“TheParty C.C. or its Bureau have the right to insert their
official documents, statements, etc., in the magazineKommunist,
without however taking up more than 15 per cent of the total
space.”

[2]Differencesbetween Lenin, and Radek and the Social-Democratic
Party of Poland and Lithuania on the national question. The
essence of these differences is set out by Lenin in his article “The
Discussion on Self-Determination Summed Up” (see present
edition, Vol. 22, pp. 320–60).

[3]SeeNote 467.